Professor Alan Dershowitz, of the Harvard Law School, spoke before friends of the Hudson Institute in New York [yesterday]. Hudson Institute is a major think tank that conducts research to advance global security, prosperity and freedom.

Among other things, Professor Dershowitz revealed that Noam Chomsky, the radical leftist, had once been his camp counselor. Apparently, Counselor Chomsky did no lasting harm to Counselor Dershowitz.

Another thing Professor Dershowitz revealed tells us much about former President Jimmy Carter. It seems that when Carter appeared at Brandeis to plug his book Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid, he pledged to answer any questions that students e-mailed him afterward. Many took him up on the offer, and Carter did answer every question... except one.

That one was this: Did you advise Yasser Arafat to reject the peace offer Israel made at Camp David, at the end of Clinton's term? According to Professor Dershowitz, some 15 students e-mailed that question, and they were the only students not to be answered.

Hmm.

Professor Dershowitz also recalled his visit to the University of California at Irvine, which is a hotbed of anti-Israel agitation. He spoke to a large crowd, and first asked those who considered themselves pro-Israel to raise their hands. About 250 hands were raised. He then asked them if they would accept a Palestinian state, side by side, living in peace with Israel. Every hand went up.

Then he asked how many considered themselves pro-Palestinian. About 150 hands were raised. Finally, he asked this group whether they would accept a Jewish state of Israel, living side by side in peace with a new Palestinian state. Not a single hand went up.

Finally, he asked this group whether they would accept a Jewish state of Israel, living side by side in peace with a new Palestinian state. Not a single hand went up.

Really not surprising. You are dealing with Muslims. They are not going to live in peace with an Infidel state next door,especially one they consider is on Muslim land.

The Muslims might endure a peaceful period until they can overcome Israel. The end justifies the means.- Tom

HUDNA - Arabic word often translated as "cease-fire.- Historically used as a tactic aimed at allowing the party declaring the hudna to regroup while tricking an enemy into lowering its guard. When the hudna expires, the party that declared it is stronger and the enemy weaker. The term comes from the story of the Muslim conquest of Mecca. Instead of a rapid victory, Muhammad made a ten-year treaty with the Kuraysh tribe. In 628 AD, after only two years of the ten-year treaty, Muhammad and his forces concluded that the Kuraysh were too weak to resist. The Muslims broke the treaty and took over all of Mecca without opposition.

Typical of the murderous, genocidal heart of both the political “progressive” (sic) left and the Islamo-fascists. Both would see Israel obliterated if they could. This is why David Horowitz correctly describes the alliance of convenience between the left and the Islamo-jihad-nutters as the “unholy alliance”

> Has Chumpsky actually done any work in the field for which he is paid in the last 30 years? <

Absolutely. Entirely apart from his terrible political philosophy, he has had a HUGE impact as a scholar. He has had an important output of publications, and perhaps more significantly, his ideas have shaped a whole generation or two of younger linguists.

Until recently, in fact, almost everyone in linguistics considered Chomsky the world’s number one linguistic scientist, not to mention his substantial influence in the field of cognitive psychology. Quite a few people have even looked upon his intellectual contributions as being equal to those of Newton, Maxwell or Einstein.

In the last few years, however, Noam’s ideas have steadily fallen out of favor — so much so that many prominent linguists and cognitive psychologists now feel Chomsky basically led their disciplines down a blind alley.

Kind of unusual that Derschowitz would be invited as a guest speaker at a Hudson Institute event. It shows that the Israeli-Arab confrontation sometimes makes strange political bedfellows, since the Hudson Institute is generally considred “neocon” while Derschowitz is generally thought of as a “liberal.”

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.